[jdp]

In the cases of some public servants, like police officers, that is not a direct parallel as they are not spending a lot of time in the office. Public servants performing their duty in public should be subject to the scrutiny of the public. Even if you are a government employee working at a desk in a public building you should be subject to the same. I admit it is just not feasible to allow any and all private citizens access to buildings, or to mount cameras as they desire, but there is a perhaps a better solution? Surveillance tapes available upon request?

[Anechoic]

Public servants performing their duty in public should be subject to the scrutiny of the public.

That's usually the caveat I put when I make that statement, but I forgot to that time (and again, most of my govt work is in public and I would fall under that).

There are times when privacy is essential for govt workers but those times rarely during public interaction, and when they are, it's usually because the tasks are sensitive (an interview with a rape victim for example).

[m_eiman]

In the interview case it's the victim's privacy that prevents monitoring, not the interviewer's.